A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Things to think of before you get married again..



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #131  
Old October 10th 06, 08:40 AM posted to alt.child-support,alt.mens-rights,alt.support.divorce
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Things to think of before you get married again..

Any woman who isn't in menapause or had a hestrectomy is considered
fertile. DOn't believe woman who 'say' they are on the pill. Take
matters into your own hands.


Gini wrote:
wrote
.............................

Deary, a vasectomy is cheaper than a month of child support. If you
don't want to breed, don't have sex with a fertile woman,

==
And how is he to know when she is fertile?


  #132  
Old October 10th 06, 09:28 AM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Nearl J Icarus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Things to think of before you get married again..

says...

Hey - pass over that key (latchkey), will ya?? I lost mine, and can't


I was a latchkey kid, my parents were married in 1951. Where ya been?

  #133  
Old October 10th 06, 10:59 AM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Moon Shyne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 427
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Phil" wrote in message
link.net...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Tripped over it again, did you?

Phil wrote:

You also raise another interesting problem: what if the mother
doesn't tell him about the pregnancy, does he STILL have
responsibilities and what are they?
It's still his semen, right? I mean, just because he doesn't know
that
he did something doesn't mean that he didn't do it. So yeah, he
still
has a degree of moral accountability, and if the child is alive,
he
definitely has legal accountability.

How so?

Because it's his semen.

"His semen, his choice, his responsibility."

What about the moral responsibility she should have to at least
inform him of the pregnancy?

You keep trying that sleazy trick, but it's not gonna work.

That she has such a moral responsibility does not serve to negate any
responsibility that he has.

What I'm asking you to do is to accept the responsibilities that
*you*
have, and you respond by resisting that with every fiber of your
being.

Disgusting.

Your little feminist biology lesson is based on wishful thinking and
not
established biological information. How hard is it to understand eggs
are a
scarcer resource than sperm? And having a child takes a greater
investment
on the part of a woman. Because of those biological facts woman by
nature
should be more selective in mates because a bad choice has long term
implications and is a reflection on her discretion in selecting the
right
sperm.

To say men are responsible for women's bad choices in sperm is to
transfer
the biological misjudgments made by women to men. The femwits who
can't
accept their biological destiny want to have the state step in with
remedies
to cover up their biological mistakes. The state's solution is to use
men's
money to cover-up the lack of responsibility by women who don't select
good
mates.


You might as well talk to a brick, Bob. This one can't see beyond their
own hatred for men, much like a couple of other gender-feminists I could
name.


Have you seen the TV commercial where hundreds of sperm are shown swimming
across the screen and the announcer talks about all the available choices
and then the sperm morph into PC mice?

It reminds me of these feminist types who could have chosen better sperm
providers just as easily as they could have chosen a better PC mouse
providers. :-)

And, in case you are wondering, I find it offensive male reproductive
biology is used in such a light-hearted way to sell a product. You would
NEVER see a woman's egg used in such a whimsical way.


But ya sure don't mind when they use her tits and ass to sell things, huh?





  #134  
Old October 10th 06, 11:06 AM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Fred
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 62
Default Things to think of before you get married again..

?-? wrote:
"Fred" wrote in

Both base child support on the combined gross incomes of both parents,



That's after they impute his income up and impute her income down, then it's
calulated.

Have a friend whose ex's income was imputed down to the point of where they
said she was earning only $800/mth as an RN.


What jurisdiction?
  #135  
Old October 10th 06, 12:35 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Ken Chaddock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 53
Default Things to think of before you get married again..

Fred wrote:
Gini wrote:

"teachrmama" wrote
............................

And you, Fred, are totally *dismissing* WOMEN'S responsibilities! I
am a woman, and I find it demeaning that you keep harping on what MEN
should do, but not a hint about how WOMEN should handle their
responibilities in the same situation. Everything a woman does after
the sex act is a consequence of where that mean old man left his
semen. Nonsense! Or maybe I'm just reading you wrong--why don't you
clearly delineate what the woman's responsibilities are after the
consequence of pregnancy becomes an issue.


==
A ride to the CSE office? (Because she's *owed* it, of course.)


I guess that the matter is best explained by reference to the theme of
the game Fable: "For every choice, a consequence."


It's too bad that you seem to grasp the obvious fact that all post
conception choices are the woman's and therefore, in accordance with the
precepts of "Natural/Fundamental" Justice, all the consequences that
follow from those choices should also be hers.


So he chooses to spread his semen hither and yon, and she chooses to let
him spread it in her. And let's say that the consequence is pregnancy.


But that's as far as the "consequence" of his "spreading his sperm
around" go. After that the woman has many options and CHOICES...even if
she decides (note the word "decides") not to abort the fetus, that to,
is a CHOICE, the consequence of which will most likely be the birth of a
child...

Now there are other choices to be made, in this case by her, and from
those choices will spring consequences in turn.


Yes, as I noted above, but ALL post conception choices are HER choices,
to hold him responsible for the consequences that follow from HER
choices is fundamentally unfair, unjust and, on top of all that, most
likely unconstitutional...

Had there been no pregnancy, the consequences resulting therefrom would
not have occurred, because the choices resulting therefrom would not
have had to be made. And had he not spread his semen around, or had she
chosen not to let him spread his semen in her, there would have been no
pregnancy.


Even though true in most cases (though not in *all* cases), the fact
that there ARE post conception choices for the woman, negates the causal
link between the "spreading of his sperm" and childbirth...as they say
in mathematics, sperm is "a necessary but not a sufficient" requirement
for creating a baby. The mother's CHOICES completely outweigh and can
completely negate his "contribution" at any time during the gestation
period...up to (literally) seconds before a natural live birth would
have taken place.

Yes, she contributed to that pregnancy. But so did he, and attempts to
deny that fact with sanctimonious bleatings to the effect of "her body,
her choice, her responsibility" are simply not valid.


You are absolutely and completely wrong.
"Her Body = Her Choice = Her Responsibility" is a completely valid,
legally and morally consistent concept that springs from the reality
that in a "just" system of jurisprudence, from the power/authority to
take action arises responsibility for the consequences of the
power/action. When the power is solely held by one person, the
responsibility for the consequences of the action (or indeed the
inaction) rests solely on that one individual. In this case, the woman
has sole, sovereign, authority to determine whether any pregnancy will
be allowed to continue...that is a CHOICE with two possibilities, abort
or do not abort...BOTH are choices with consequences and both are HERS
ALONE and therefore the consequences of either of those CHOICES should
be hers alone...

Yes, he does not have input into certain downstream
choices/consequences. That's unfortunate, but it does not absolve him
from taking at least some responsibility for the consequences of his
behavior in spreading his semen hither and yon, including downstream
consequences not of his choosing, for at the end of the day it's "his
semen, his choice, his responsibility."


The consequence of his "spreading his sperm hither and yon" may be an
unwanted pregnancy however, since Roe-v-Wade, NO MAN has been
responsible for the birth of a child...that responsibility is solely the
woman's because she has the sole authority to take the decisions and
actions that MUST BE TAKEN for the pregnancy to continue and the child
to be born...

Abortion? Without an unwanted pregnancy, there is no abortion. And
without his semen, there is no unwanted pregnancy. "His semen, his
choice, his responsibility."


Yes, I agree 100% that he is equally responsible for the pregnancy but
SHE is responsible for HER choice to continue the pregnancy and the
consequences that arise from that decision...

Child support? Without a pregnancy, there is no child to support. And
without his semen, there is no pregnancy. "His semen, his choice, his
responsibility."


Drivel...this completely absolves the woman of the natural consequences
of the exercise of HER sole authority...

What, I want to know, is so damned bad about suggesting that people take
responsibility?


But that's exactly what we're asking for, that the sole, sovereign
authority of the woman over this process be recognized and that she be
morally and legally constrained to accept sole responsibility for the
consequences of the decisions and actions that she takes...
In the case where her decisions and actions are influenced by the man,
then HIS actions must also be taken into consideration, but the fact
that she finds herself pregnant isn't na influence of this nature since
it does not effect her decision making. As a example of what I mean; if
he tells her that he wants the child and will support her and/or will
take the child if she doesn't want it, then, IMHO, he's "on the hook"
and is responsible.

....ken
  #136  
Old October 10th 06, 12:46 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Moon Shyne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 427
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"Ken Chaddock" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Fred wrote:
Gini wrote:

"teachrmama" wrote
............................

And you, Fred, are totally *dismissing* WOMEN'S responsibilities! I am
a woman, and I find it demeaning that you keep harping on what MEN
should do, but not a hint about how WOMEN should handle their
responibilities in the same situation. Everything a woman does after
the sex act is a consequence of where that mean old man left his semen.
Nonsense! Or maybe I'm just reading you wrong--why don't you clearly
delineate what the woman's responsibilities are after the consequence
of pregnancy becomes an issue.

==
A ride to the CSE office? (Because she's *owed* it, of course.)


I guess that the matter is best explained by reference to the theme of
the game Fable: "For every choice, a consequence."


It's too bad that you seem to grasp the obvious fact that all post
conception choices are the woman's and therefore, in accordance with the
precepts of "Natural/Fundamental" Justice, all the consequences that
follow from those choices should also be hers.


So he chooses to spread his semen hither and yon, and she chooses to let
him spread it in her. And let's say that the consequence is pregnancy.


But that's as far as the "consequence" of his "spreading his sperm around"
go. After that the woman has many options and CHOICES...even if she
decides (note the word "decides") not to abort the fetus, that to, is a
CHOICE, the consequence of which will most likely be the birth of a
child...


And if the child is born, how does that absolve the man from any
responsibility for or to the child?
Isn't it still 50% genetically his child, and legally his child as well?


Now there are other choices to be made, in this case by her, and from
those choices will spring consequences in turn.


Yes, as I noted above, but ALL post conception choices are HER choices, to
hold him responsible for the consequences that follow from HER choices is
fundamentally unfair, unjust and, on top of all that, most likely
unconstitutional...


So because she has choices that pertain strictly to undergoing (or not
undergoing) a medical and surgical procedure, you think this absolves the
man from any responsibility, even though it's still his child?


Had there been no pregnancy, the consequences resulting therefrom would
not have occurred, because the choices resulting therefrom would not have
had to be made. And had he not spread his semen around, or had she chosen
not to let him spread his semen in her, there would have been no
pregnancy.


Even though true in most cases (though not in *all* cases), the fact that
there ARE post conception choices for the woman, negates the causal link
between the "spreading of his sperm" and childbirth...as they say in
mathematics, sperm is "a necessary but not a sufficient" requirement for
creating a baby. The mother's CHOICES completely outweigh and can
completely negate his "contribution" at any time during the gestation
period...up to (literally) seconds before a natural live birth would have
taken place.

Yes, she contributed to that pregnancy. But so did he, and attempts to
deny that fact with sanctimonious bleatings to the effect of "her body,
her choice, her responsibility" are simply not valid.


You are absolutely and completely wrong.
"Her Body = Her Choice = Her Responsibility" is a completely valid,
legally and morally consistent concept that springs from the reality that
in a "just" system of jurisprudence, from the power/authority to take
action arises responsibility for the consequences of the power/action.
When the power is solely held by one person, the responsibility for the
consequences of the action (or indeed the inaction) rests solely on that
one individual. In this case, the woman has sole, sovereign, authority to
determine whether any pregnancy will be allowed to continue...that is a
CHOICE with two possibilities, abort or do not abort...BOTH are choices
with consequences and both are HERS ALONE and therefore the consequences
of either of those CHOICES should be hers alone...

Yes, he does not have input into certain downstream choices/consequences.
That's unfortunate, but it does not absolve him from taking at least some
responsibility for the consequences of his behavior in spreading his
semen hither and yon, including downstream consequences not of his
choosing, for at the end of the day it's "his semen, his choice, his
responsibility."


The consequence of his "spreading his sperm hither and yon" may be an
unwanted pregnancy however, since Roe-v-Wade, NO MAN has been responsible
for the birth of a child...that responsibility is solely the woman's
because she has the sole authority to take the decisions and actions that
MUST BE TAKEN for the pregnancy to continue and the child to be born...

Abortion? Without an unwanted pregnancy, there is no abortion. And
without his semen, there is no unwanted pregnancy. "His semen, his
choice, his responsibility."


Yes, I agree 100% that he is equally responsible for the pregnancy but SHE
is responsible for HER choice to continue the pregnancy and the
consequences that arise from that decision...

Child support? Without a pregnancy, there is no child to support. And
without his semen, there is no pregnancy. "His semen, his choice, his
responsibility."


Drivel...this completely absolves the woman of the natural consequences of
the exercise of HER sole authority...

What, I want to know, is so damned bad about suggesting that people take
responsibility?


But that's exactly what we're asking for, that the sole, sovereign
authority of the woman over this process be recognized and that she be
morally and legally constrained to accept sole responsibility for the
consequences of the decisions and actions that she takes...
In the case where her decisions and actions are influenced by the man,
then HIS actions must also be taken into consideration, but the fact that
she finds herself pregnant isn't na influence of this nature since it does
not effect her decision making. As a example of what I mean; if he tells
her that he wants the child and will support her and/or will take the
child if she doesn't want it, then, IMHO, he's "on the hook" and is
responsible.

...ken



  #137  
Old October 10th 06, 01:42 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Fred
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 62
Default Things to think of before you get married again..

Ken Chaddock wrote:
Fred wrote:
Gini wrote:

"teachrmama" wrote
............................

And you, Fred, are totally *dismissing* WOMEN'S responsibilities! I
am a woman, and I find it demeaning that you keep harping on what
MEN should do, but not a hint about how WOMEN should handle their
responibilities in the same situation. Everything a woman does after
the sex act is a consequence of where that mean old man left his
semen. Nonsense! Or maybe I'm just reading you wrong--why don't
you clearly delineate what the woman's responsibilities are after
the consequence of pregnancy becomes an issue.

==
A ride to the CSE office? (Because she's *owed* it, of course.)


I guess that the matter is best explained by reference to the theme of
the game Fable: "For every choice, a consequence."


It's too bad that you seem to grasp the obvious fact that all post
conception choices are the woman's and therefore, in accordance with the
precepts of "Natural/Fundamental" Justice, all the consequences that
follow from those choices should also be hers.


I am aware of what Canada's notion of "natural justice". I know that it
allows Canada to declare age discrimination to be legal even though it
is unconstitutional; see McKinney v. University of Guelph. So if you
expect me to buy any argument based on that concept, you are swimming
upstream.

I read your entire message. What it boils down to is yet another attempt
to evade your responsibilities by ignoring the doctrine of informed
consent. Sorry, but men can't just spread their semen hither and yon and
walk away from the consequences thereof because those consequences are
.... *inconvenient*. That's "inconvenient" as in financially
inconvenient, because at the end of the day it's always about the money
with y'all.

It's disgusting, really.
  #138  
Old October 10th 06, 01:46 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Things to think of before you get married again..

Fred -

You are Fred aren't you, and not Cindy, Sharon, Luoise, or some other
feminist disguising yourself to make it look like you are chivalrous?

Since your whole beef on the subject is men taking responsibility for
an action of enjoyment, I wonder if you live inside your home all day
long? No? You mean you do venture out to partake in activities that
bring joy into your life, like perhaps water skiiing, mountain
climbing, handgliding, or maybe something as simple as heading down to
Barnes&Noble to check out a new book? You do? Great! You're now a
hypocrite. You see, Fred, you should have taken responsibility for
your actions by NOT engaging in these activities that bring your
enjoyment. Why? Because people are killed every day from doing those
things, including hopping in their car or on their bike and going just
a short distance.

So, the next time you decide to take action by engaging in an activity
that brings you enjoyment - no matter what it is - remember YOU are
taking a risk by doing so, therefore, YOU have the responsibility for
your actions beforehand.


Fred wrote:
Andre Lieven wrote:
"Tracy" ) writes:
"Gini" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
wrote
.............................
Deary, a vasectomy is cheaper than a month of child support. If you
don't want to breed, don't have sex with a fertile woman,
==
And how is he to know when she is fertile?
Isn't a vasectomy only cheaper than a month of child support if child
support is more than a vasecotmy? How much is a vasectomy?


How much is a tubal ligation ?


Here's something interesting:

"The cost of vasectomy is typically 3 to 4 times less than the cost of
tubal ligation. Although prices vary, regionally, vasectomy costs
generally range from about two hundrend fifty to one thousand dollars,
while the cost of tubal ligation often begin at about one thousand
dollars and may go as high as twenty-five hundred dollars. The cost
difference is mainly due to the fact of where each procedure is
performed; an office procedure vs. a hospital procedure."

http://womenshealth.about.com/cs/ste...zhisorhe_3.htm

But it's not really about cost, is it?

It's about taking responsibility.

And let's face it, he's responsible for where his semen ends up, and in
this day and age, I don't think it's reasonable for him to say that he
didn't know *all* of the potential consequences of his actions. So
here's a question:

How much is a condom?


  #139  
Old October 10th 06, 02:33 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Phil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 387
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
I just took a look at the child support guidelines for Michigan and
Virginia, two jurisdictions in which I have lived. Both base child
support on the combined gross incomes of both parents, as well as
taking into account the amount of time the child spends with each.
Basically, it's the same sort of equity-based system that will be
going into effect here in Minnesota on January 1.

You might want to take a look at the child support guidelines in the
jurisdiction in which you live.


What a load of naivete! chuckle


Don't it just make it understandable how the states are able to pull the
crap they pull when someone naive comes on and acts like the state is
doing a good job in relation to families?
Phil #3


  #140  
Old October 10th 06, 02:46 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Phil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 387
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Phil" wrote in message
link.net...

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Phil wrote:
"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Gini wrote:
"Fred" wrote
....................
What, I want to know, is so damned bad about suggesting that
people take responsibility?
==
Not at all--In fact we agree. She had the responsibility to not
have sex when she was ovulating
and had the responsibility to know when she is ovulating and the
responsibility to tell him when
she was ovulating. Apparently, she failed to do so. What we seem
to have (systemically, in our society)
is a failure to compel women to accept responsibility for their
actions and decisions and we them condemn
men for not anticipating her lack of responsibility.
I don't think that it is an either/or situation. Both parties bear
a responsibility. What I object to are the representations to the
effect that one party is solely responsible to the exclusion of
the other. Think about it: some men use sanctimonious statements
such as "her body, her choice, her responsibility" to evade their
own responsibilities. I know this because those men conspicuously
evade my statement, "his semen, his choice, his responsibility."

Failing to grasp that HER choice, whatever is may be, overrides his
choice and with it goes the sole responsibility for that choice.
The ONE making the decisions should accept the consequences of
their decision.

Those who contributed to the condition are both accountable.


But as you say in another post, men and women are different and have
different responsibilities due to their biological differences so
take a stand and stand by it already.


With pregnancy, men should be held equally liable to that of the
mother, which means they should have the option of raising the
child as they see fit every bit as much as the other but when the
parents are not involved in an intact relationship, BOTH parents
should be equal in custody, support (financial, emotional,
spiritual and all others) and every other facet of the child's life
unless there is a valid and just reason not to allow it.

That "valid and just" phrase speaks to equity, which is fine with
me. Not equality; equity.


No, equality, I didn't misspell it.


On the other hand, as long as women have the option to just walk
away from a living, breathing child, denying men the same right in
the same period is sexist and unequal treatment for similarly
situated people. As long as women have the option to decide whether
to become parents at all, men should have the same legal right
during the same period.

And there it is! The man seeks to evade responsibility for his
actions.


No, not at all. You need to learn to comprehend the written word.
That is NOT what I said. Perhaps if I typed r-e-a-l s-l-o-w...
I'm promoting equality. You see it as something else. Why, I'm not
sure but I suspect you are a gender-feminist and ashamed to admit it.


Maybe "he" is really a "she" who is not getting the amount she feels
she is entitled to. OR maybe his mother didn't get enough child
support form any of the men she let knock her up so she wouldn't have
to work. He (or she) sounds bitter, angry, and absolutely foolsih.
(and maybe related to MoonShyne--you can tell by the tap dancing)


Any of the above is possible and one or more is even likely. We've all
seen this type come on, stay a while and then disappear. They actually
do a service; they prove what many here have been saying that there are
some people (men included) who just have a phobia in relation to men. It
could be brain damage, psychological problems or any one of a bunch of
other conditions whereby they are unable to make logical sense.
The one thing they all have it common is the inability to post for more
than three threads without showing themselves to be prejudiced which is
often observed plainly on post number 1. When this is combined with none
of their ideas being thought out, they come off like total asses who are
completely unaware of their surroundings and what's going on in the real
world around them.
One of the most common identifiers is name-calling as argument; another
is the inability to refrain from cutting another's post's to change the
sense, tense or meaning of the sentence or part thereof and argue
against something not said.
Phil#3


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 February 28th 05 06:27 AM
Parent-Child Negotiations Nathan A. Barclay Spanking 623 January 28th 05 05:24 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 December 29th 04 06:26 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 November 28th 04 06:16 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 June 28th 04 07:42 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.